This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Saltstone, R. Articles by Fraboni, M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A Note on the Word Identification Subtest of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests-Revised: Different Classification Consequences of Forms G and H

Nipissing University College

Sheila M. Tayler

Nipissing University College

Maryann Fraboni

Nipissing University College

Forty-eight students, randomly selected from among fifth-grade children who were participating in a re-test estimation study, were administered Forms G and H of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests' Word Identification subtest in a counterbalanced format. Analyses of the data indicate that the two forms of the subtest are not parallel. While a correlation between the scores on the two forms of the subtest was high (r = .86), classification reliability was poor; statistically significant levels were reached for both grade classification and quartile classification inconsistencies between the forms. Implications of these findings for the subtest's use in Woodcock profiles are discussed.

Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, Vol. 7, No. 4, 343-345 (1989)
DOI: 10.1177/073428298900700407


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. O. Williams Jr, R. C. Eaves, and C. Cox Factor Structure of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests-Revised, Forms G and H Assessment for Effective Intervention, January 1, 2001; 26(3): 35 - 42. [Abstract] [PDF]